A proposed class action by purchasers of electronic goods containing DRAM memory chips would degenerate into a series of individual trials, the British Columbia Supreme Court has held in Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. v. Infineon Technologies AG.2 Key issues, including whether the plaintiffs paid more because of price-fixing by manufacturers of the chips, could not be determined on a class-wide basis. The court thus refused to certify the action as a class proceeding. [more] Full article

On September 19, 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada refused leave to appeal the approval of an all-encompassing restructuring plan for the Canadian market in Asset-Backed Commercial Paper and put an end to all legal challenges relating to what is now appearing to be merely the first Canadian chapter in a financial crisis that has since swept the globe. [more] Full article

In its recent decision in Taub v. Investment Dealers Association of Canada, Ontario’s Divisional Court reined in an attempt by the Investment Dealers Association of Canada (now known as the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada, or IIROC) to discipline a former investment advisor, despite the fact that he had not been an IDA member for more than a year. [more] Full article

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently clarified the difference between mutual and unilateral contractual mistake in the case of Royal Bank of Canada v. El-Bris Limited. Laskin J.A., writing for the court, explained that the four prerequisites set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Performance Industries Ltd. v. Sylvan Lake Golf & Tennis Club only apply to cases of unilateral, not mutual, contractual mistake. [more] Full article